Nys Parks & Recreation Survey

38.2k · February 9, 2005

I'm only a few minutes from Vermont and Vermont geocaching is looking better and better every day.

I thought Vt banned caching in their state parks. Or has there been a change to that?

February 10, 2005

This is a rough one for me.I just came down with bone cancer,and while im being treated..i can only get around with a walker.I have about 45 to 50 caches in and around Harriman.I would never be able to get out there now and comply.Id have to remove a few years worth of work...and better.About the only thing I can do now...is watch and see what happens from now on.Im hoping to get out there again,I sure do miss it.Talk about bad timing.

38.2k · February 10, 2005

This is a rough one for me.I just came down with bone cancer,and while im being treated..i can only get around with a walker.I have about 45 to 50 caches in and around Harriman.I would never be able to get out there now and comply.Id have to remove a few years worth of work...and better.About the only thing I can do now...is watch and see what happens from now on.Im hoping to get out there again,I sure do miss it.Talk about bad timing.

Sorry to hear about that Bill. Wishing you a speedy recovery. If you need help with any of your caches be sure to come to this forum and ask. You've given us lots of pleasure over the years and I'm sure you will find many here who are willing to give you a hand.

February 10, 2005

What we need is for someone to approach each of the park managers in our region about getting permission to place a geocache in that park, hopefully someone who has not already placed a lot of caches without permission. Once it has been determined how that individual park manager reacts, how strictly they enforce the twenty foot rule, how they feel about the other caches that are already in place, that should be reported back to this board. That way, those of us who would like to get legal can know that there will be good faith cooperation and have an idea what to expect. Until the water has been tested, most of us are not going to jump in.

This past weekend I hiked in James Baird state park, scoping for placement. I had intended on going back on Monday to ask for permission but coming from a noncaching family my plans are not always easily carried out. My intention was to first approach a park that had no caches placed... once I see what the reaction in the area is my next move would be Fahnestock. I didn't want to open that can of worms again till I felt it was safe. Depending on the reactions my hope was to plan an overnight event at Fahnestock for the spring. Hopefully something where we can have the parks personnel meet with us for discussion and clarification of the new rules and so we can collectively voice some of our concerns. Those are my thoughts anyways...we'll see how far I make it with them.

Big Bill so sorry to hear of your illness... more wishes and prayers for a speedy recovery. You definitely are responsible for changing the color of Harriman on the map... geocaching map anyways.

Edited February 10, 2005 by Ttepee

3.9k · February 10, 2005

This is a rough one for me.I just came down with bone cancer,and while im being treated..i can only get around with a walker.I have about 45 to 50 caches in and around Harriman.I would never be able to get out there now and comply.Id have to remove a few years worth of work...and better.About the only thing I can do now...is watch and see what happens from now on.Im hoping to get out there again,I sure do miss it.Talk about bad timing.

Sorry to hear about that Bill. Wishing you a speedy recovery. If you need help with any of your caches be sure to come to this forum and ask. You've given us lots of pleasure over the years and I'm sure you will find many here who are willing to give you a hand.

What he said. Best wishes Bill.

8.1k · February 10, 2005

This is a rough one for me.I just came down with bone cancer,and while im being treated..i can only get around with a walker.I have about 45 to 50 caches in and around Harriman.I would never be able to get out there now and comply.Id have to remove a few years worth of work...and better.About the only thing I can do now...is watch and see what happens from now on.Im hoping to get out there again,I sure do miss it.Talk about bad timing.

Hey Bigbill,

Wish you a speedy recovery. I have had the pleasure of finding some of your Harriman caches. I frequent the park for hiking and I would love to help you either, maintain, remove or replace any of the caches you have. Just let me know

1.5k · February 10, 2005

This is a rough one for me.I just came down with bone cancer,and while im being treated..i can only get around with a walker.I have about 45 to 50 caches in and around Harriman.I would never be able to get out there now and comply.Id have to remove a few years worth of work...and better.About the only thing I can do now...is watch and see what happens from now on.Im hoping to get out there again,I sure do miss it.Talk about bad timing.

I hope you get back out there soon too Bill, best wishes for a fast full recovery. Like the others have said any problems, post it here and we'll cover it until you're back on the trails.

February 10, 2005

This is a rough one for me.I just came down with bone cancer,and while im being treated..i can only get around with a walker.I have about 45 to 50 caches in and around Harriman.I would never be able to get out there now and comply.Id have to remove a few years worth of work...and better.About the only thing I can do now...is watch and see what happens from now on.Im hoping to get out there again,I sure do miss it.Talk about bad timing.

Bigbill,

speedy recovery - and let me know if you need help with any of your wonderful caches - I'd be glad to assist!

February 10, 2005

Today I called the Saratoga Spa State Park office to feel out the new geocaching permit process. I was told I would need a new geocaching permit for each cache in the park, but this I knew and previous years I had a land use permit covering the caches. They would have mailed the permit to my home but since I only live a few minutes away I decided I’d go pick it up.

When I arrived they handed me the permit and went over the whole thing with me, section by section. I filled out the permit and since the gentleman I was talking with had never seen a cache site and the one on the permit was only .25 mile away we went out and I showed him the cache. He was pleased with the cache location and the hide but he was not impressed with a CD that was inside. One form PYX 106 radio station and with songs titles like “doing your mother” and such. When I left there today the park manager still needed to sign the permit and assignee a number to it and the sticker. The gentleman that went out to the cache with me volunteered to return and affix the sticker as soon as it’s filled out. This is not going to be the norm. I don’t think they will be visiting the actual cache site but do want you to mark it on their park map plus put the coordinates on the application. The normal process is will be for us to go get the blank permit, fill it out, send it back to the park, they approve/deny it, send it back to you then you go place the cache with a NYS sticker on the container. Yup, that’s two trips to place a cache. I should have the signed permit in the mail within a couple days and will return to the cache to verify the sticker is on the ammo can.

While going over the permit in the park office they whipped out a folder with cache pages already printed out for all the caches inside the park. They’re no dummies, they know what’s there. One of my caches was over two years old and I was told I could not get a permit for that one, it had to be moved now since it has already been there for two years. When I asked how far “must be moved” is he didn’t know and would find out for me. He did agree to waiting until after the snow is gone before moving it. When questioned about the 20 foot rule he seemed pretty firm on that issue. While special circumstances could arise depending on each location he didn’t like the idea of deviating from the 20 foot rule.

After today and reading over the new geocaching permit for NYS parks it’s not likely I’ll ever place another cache in a state park. Fact is I’ll probably archive and pick them all up come spring time. I put a lot of work in some of my caches and I’ll be dadgum if I’ll do that for a two year cache. If it was just a box in the woods that would be one thing but we are talking about caches like X Marks the Cache and Box of Junk. Thank God Word Search Hell isn’t in a state park, there’s 26 parts to that one. Would I need 5 volunteers to help get all the permits?

The three pictures below were scanned from the permit.

February 10, 2005

Hey, maybe something good can come out of this.

Since the state is regulating cache placement, they ought to be able to make it an infraction

of some sort to move or remove a cache.

Not suggesting muggles go to jail, but something akin to a parking ticket. The state-issued sticker could include a warning that the cache must not be moved from its approved location, except by the placer or park personnel.

3.9k · February 10, 2005

All in all, it beats caching being banned all together. This really isn't terrible, inconvenient, but not terrible.

February 10, 2005

I volunteer to have my name placed on caches if needed. I certainly won't be able to actually maintain them, being in NJ and all, but I'll help this way if need be. <_<

8.1k · February 11, 2005

I think the permits could have been ALOT worse and stricter. I understand they are a nuisance, but I regularly visit and maintain my caches. There is no $1,000,000 liability clause, which is good. And the .25 rule is not too big a deal. So all in all, I am okay with it. It will mean less smilies while caching in Harriman! <_<

1.5k · February 11, 2005

All in all, it beats caching being banned all together. This really isn't terrible, inconvenient, but not terrible.

Did you see the part where it says no caches in a tree or in the water? I remember a particular JMB CRL cache that's in a tree in the water. <_<

February 11, 2005

No bushwhacking to any caches? Would that be considered "jay-hiking"?

Geez, next thing you know, they'll be asking for identity papers at all park entrances... "Halt! Ausweispapiere!"

3.9k · February 11, 2005

All in all, it beats caching being banned all together. This really isn't terrible, inconvenient, but not terrible.

Did you see the part where it says no caches in a tree or in the water? I remember a particular JMB CRL cache that's in a tree in the water.

Good point.

February 11, 2005

The question is, how do those of us who have already placed caches come into compliance? Do we start removing caches that would not comply with the new rules? That would be caches more than 20' off trail, older than two years, near any cliff or other hazard. I would not have many left. Should we talk to the park manager first, before removing caches? I have thought of this, but it is quite possible that the park manager would demand that all caches placed without a permit be archived and removed.

The net effect could well be that all the conscientious cache maintainers remove their caches, leaving only those dump and forget type caches. This would mean that the precentage of junk caches would increase. Would the geocaching organization undertake to archive and remove such caches? The regulation calls for caches to be checked twice a year, I would think there may be grounds for this. Why should only the caches of the good cache maintainers be removed? This would illustrate a willingness to police ourselves and increase our credibility in the eyes of the park authorities.

Anyway you hack it, a lot of caches are going to be removed. They are not going to say, "Oh never mind, all the caches can stay.". By my count, I have 28 caches in New York State Parks, I doubt if even a dozen of them will fall within the placement rules. It took a long time to place them, it is going to take a long time to remove them. The question is do I start removing the most obviously non-compliant caches now, or wait until confronted by the park authorities or geocaching.com and perhaps be forced to archive and remove them all.

3.9k · February 11, 2005

I've got about 25 or so in state parks. Actually, with mutis it's more like 30 or 40. I'll be waiting to hear from someone.

February 11, 2005

I see a number of different issues here.

.25 - not a problem.

Permit - zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz we've been there and done that and got the DEC to change it's policy - why can't we get them to communicate with the SPs?

20ft - that is friggin' nonsense. That shows that they have absolutely no concept of how their own land will be affected.

Who suggested that NYGO speak for everyone? With all due respect to the cachers there - and it sounds like NYAdmin may very well be one - He/she should be the one handling the bulk of the interactions with these officials (as a representative of GC.com) since it will be statewide policies that are put in place. I am sure NYGO's plan of a test area were 100% with good intentions but this is an example of how good intentions go bad and all suffer. However it seems some wish to speak for all when they do not have the authority to do so.

edit: REALLY poor grammatical error.

Edited February 11, 2005 by Squealy

February 11, 2005

I do remember appeals being made on this discussion board for participation in NYGO, I also received an individual e-mail asking me to participate in negotiations, which I ignored. I don't think it is fair for those of us who have declined to participate to sit on the sidelines and complain. I have been in negotiations with the state over the Catskill 3500 Club canisters, it is a pain in the neck, which is why I declined to get involved. We don't know what the opening demands of the State were but I do know state bureaucrats act as if their positions are carved in stone, mandated by State Law, the State Constitution and the will of the almighty.

The status quo was not going to be allowed to continue and I think they did well to wring agreement to the permission of geocaching at all, given the staunch opposition in many quarters. I see some wriggle room in the wording about "the discretion of the park managers", but I also worry about this, as it could be used against us. Given that so much is going to depend on the goodwill of the park managers, stonewalling or defiance on our part is unlikely to yield positive results. Yes, we are looking for cooperation on their part, but they will also be looking for cooperation on ours. It would be a real mistake to just dig our heels in and force them to come down on us.

Edited February 11, 2005 by jonboy

38.2k · February 11, 2005

Given that so much is going to depend on the goodwill of the park managers, stonewalling or defiance on our part is unlikely to yield positive results. Yes, we are looking for cooperation on their part, but they will also be looking for cooperation on ours. It would be a real mistake to just dig our heels and force them to come down on us.

This is a good thing to remember.

20ft - that is friggin' nonsense. That shows that they have absolutely no concept of how their own land will be affected.

My chief concern with the 20 foot rule is that herd paths WILL form leading to many caches. I can see the park officials pointing these out and using them as an excuse to ban geocaching, saying its proof that its detrimental to the environment.

Secondary concerns include the facts that it will expose caches to discovery (and theft) by non geocachers and reduce the number of interesting areas and good hiding places available.

Edited February 11, 2005 by briansnat

8.1k · February 11, 2005

Given that so much is going to depend on the goodwill of the park managers, stonewalling or defiance on our part is unlikely to yield positive results. Yes, we are looking for cooperation on their part, but they will also be looking for cooperation on ours. It would be a real mistake to just dig our heels in and force them to come down on us.

I totally agree with this. We should be proactive about removing caches and getting permits for replacements. Sitting back and letting things happen can only lead to worse relationships with the state managers should a situation arise. We need to start afresh and present ourselves in the best possible light, not giving state managers a reason to impose more bans or regulations upon us.

Example: I sit by the sidelines, just leaving my caches alone. Someone goes to find my cache, parks their car blocking a ranger road (it happens despite giving legit parking coordinates). State park cops come by and have a run-in with the geocacher who explains what he is doing. It now reflects poorly on me since I have a placed cache left without permission in a problematic area. Our caches are not hidden from the public (or park's) eyes available online so it is not hard to figure out where they are (exact coordinates to be precise!!!) and who placed them.

As for the 2 year rule, going on Rusty's experience, they know what is out there and how long it has been out there. (9th line down under state place, date of placement) - may I suggest archiving the cache and placing a new one (with permit in the same location). That way you are starting afresh.

Guess we will all be spending more time retrieiving and maintaining than finding in the next couple of months!

February 11, 2005

I see a number of different issues here.

20ft - that is friggin' nonsense. That shows that they have absolutely no concept of how their own land will be affected.

Who suggested that NYGO speak for everyone?

NYGO didn't negotiate the 20-foot rule, and we're not happy about it. It was imposed by the State Parks Albany HQ. The only reasoning I can find for it is that the rules of the state parks state that you are not allowed to leave the marked trails -- period. They seem to have that rule carved in stone. Now, everyone KNOWS there are scads of people every day in the state parks who go off the marked trails, so go figure.

I am sure NYGO's plan of a test area were 100% with good intentions but this is an example of how good intentions go bad and all suffer.

NYGO contacted the folks at Letchworth specifically because there's someone here who is personal friends with one of the folks who run that park. It was a good chance to open a dialog on the subject utilizing an existing relationship instead of calling up someone in Albany cold. Why the Albany HQ ran hog wild with this and bypassed the pilot program we don't know yet.

However it seems some wish to speak for all when they do not have the authority to do so.

Geocaching is inherently a distributed community. About the closest thing we have to centralization is the popularity of the geocaching.com listing site. Personally, I applaud anyone/organization who takes steps to address geocaching issues.

As an example, we've been asked to give a presentation on geocaching at this year's New York State Recreation and Parks Society Expo. The event will be attended by recreation and parks professionals from all over the state.

Geocaching hasn't been a covert hobby for some time now. It's time to get involved early when land managers formulate polices about geocaching. Sometimes things will go very well and other times we may not get the optimum result. But, the first version of a policy doesn't mean it's the last. Helping land managers re-evaluate their geocaching policies should be part of what we do. Think of them as "evergreen" policies, we can always help them with any conerns they have and make suggestions for improvements.

When interacting with park directors around here the biggest thing they seem to like is that I'm their friend. I care about helping them. I've demonstrated they can trust me. They have my home phone number and can call me at any time if something should come up. We need to foster these kinds of close relationships so we become trusted personal friends of the park folks. These kinds of relationships will garner much more than being cantankerous.

Edited February 11, 2005 by Ferreter5

February 11, 2005

I decided I was going to remove all of my caches in NY State Parks, so that I can start fresh with permits. Today I removed "Where's the Trail", "Lichen Ledge", "Gates of the Hudson" and "Mother Hubbards Bald Spot". I was getting maxed out on cache placements which I could maintain, so this will give me a chance to start anew, and perhaps some other cacher will want to place caches in the parks I was hogging.

Edited February 11, 2005 by jonboy

February 12, 2005

I decided I was going to remove all of my caches in NY State Parks, so that I can start fresh with permits. Today I removed "Where's the Trail", "Lichen Ledge", "Gates of the Hudson" and "Mother Hubbards Bald Spot". I was getting maxed out on cache placements which I could maintain, so this will give me a chance to start anew, and perhaps some other cacher will want to place caches in the parks I was hogging.

Darn. I hadn't gotten Lichen Ledge, yet. That was a new one (relatively speaking).

3.9k · February 12, 2005

I've been in contact with our local PLC (protected land council) who have reps from State, Federal, County parks, The Nature Conservancy, The Audubon and others. Their chief concern as far as caching is off trail hiking.

I've asked for examples where they have seen destruction caused by geocaching and they cannot produce any, yet they claim they have seen it. They think placing a cache further off trail will lead to a depression of the entire area. In essence, what they're saying is that they would rather see ONE social path rather that an area that gets trampled. Again, what they don't seem to get is that caches don't get visited nearly as much as they think.

If we can get them to easy up on a state wide level then great, but don't count on it. We need to work locally to educate the land managers through different avenues. We at LIGO are lucky to have an ally who carries a lot of weight and is actively lobbying for us. This came about through a relationship with different hiking and environmental groups.

Align yourselves with groups that already have solid relationships with the land managers and you will cut years off the time it will take to build a cooperative relationship by yourself.

February 12, 2005

I see Harriman State Park as the one that is really going to be a problem. Even if I remove the ten caches that I have in the park, that will still leave over two hundred others, so that from the park managers point of view, there will still be too many caches in the park. I actually agree with the increased distance specified in the new permit application, and all my caches fall within that guideline anyway. I also agree with the idea of a cache remaining in place only two years and the requirement that it be checked on, though I would have thought once a year would be enough. Placing a cache does not guarantee a cacher imortality in the caching world. There are too many caches out there placed by people who are now inactive in geocaching, and they are maintained by others. That Bete Noir, Bassoon Pilot once suggested as much, and I have to agree that with a few years of perspective, I think he was right. He at least had the decency to remove his caches when he withdrew from geocaching.com. We need to turn over the soil so that a new crop of caches can be planted, right now Harriman is choked with weeds.

I am removing my caches in Fahnestock and Hudson Highland State Parks first because in those parks I have placed the majority of caches and thus my action will have a visible impact that will enable me to approach the park manager for a permit. I am afraid a lot more caches will have to be removed before Tim Sullivan, the Harriman Park Manager, agrees to issue permits for new caches. I think the geocaching community should think about cleaning up it's own mess, even if this means yanking out other peoples caches. I am not saying anyone should go out and do this independently, but we should do this as an organization if the cache owners decline to follow the new rules. We all knew there was a problem brewing in Harriman with the cache clutter, we should help fix it.

4.5k · February 12, 2005

If Tim Sullivan enforces the rule, there wll be 1/10 the number of caches in Harriman a year from now. Maybe none in difficult to hike to locations. There are few cachers, even dedicated ones, who will spend their time going twice to a location, especially if it includes a long hike, to place a cache for two years and then have to go back to remove it the third time.

This requirement for permits, etc. will promote more crummy caches, lessen interest in geocaching, reduce membership and income to Groundspeak, and if this takes hold in parks in general, make caching an "elitist" hobby where only the dedicated will be able to enjoy the pleasure of hiding a cache in a decent park facility.

2.8k · February 12, 2005

I hope the folks responsible for this in Harriman do the right thing for everyone involved.

I know geocaching is what brought me to Harriman and the great caches and locations is what made me fall in love with the place. I think from a Park Ranger point of view, they want people to go to their parks, and I only really went there because of geocaching, so if their goal is to have that keep occurring, they need to allow geocaching to remain at least close to what it is today. If they want the park empty and to themselves, then they can be extremely strict. Factor in, at least for me, the $$ that they received just last year alone in parking fees for the times I went there to geocache (alone, on group hikes or even Captain Avroair's event), all which could be lost if geocachers didn't come to Harriman.

While hiking in Harriman last week (geocaching) with snow still on the ground, I saw a lot of things I hadn't seen before. The number of animal marks in the snow was mind boggling. At one cache, there was a lot of evidence of animals in the area and none of humans. I can tell you the animals did a lot more "damage" since the snow fell then any humans would do in a year of geocaching to that same location.

Also while hiking, I was on some wood roads that park vehicles use, and one vehicle on those roads did more damage to trees/plant life along the side of that one road then any geocachers could do in a life time.

So hopefully, they will focus on making things better for everyone and in the end, we'll all benefit from the right decisions being made. Just knowing Jonboy is pulling some caches is killing me as they were some of the best caches in Harriman and of any caches I found.

38.2k · February 12, 2005

Just knowing Jonboy is pulling some caches is killing me as they were some of the best caches in Harriman and of any caches I found.

Ditto. We're losing the good ones and will be left with soggy, Gladware containers left by people who placed a few caches and "retired".

February 12, 2005

This Permit nonsence is complete BS. Everytime the people find something fun and inexpensive for recreation, the dadgum State of New York has to regulate and destroy the whole thing. With New York State being one of the most oppresive states in the union, this move hardly shocks this cacher. From education to legislation this state is by far the most disfunctional messes in the country. If any moderate number of citizens do anything, the state wants to regulate them.

The State likes to make things so miserable and such a pain in the a** that it's not even worth your time to engage in the activity.

In addition, I would like to know what the big deal is about a few hundred little boxes hidden in the forest. I mean if the State was so interested in saving the park the morons can start by cleaning up all the garbage and beer cans which I haul out of their precious park every weekend.

I just stashed my first hide on Wednesday in Harriman and if this goes through I have no intension on placing another. In addition the park can kiss my a** if they think I'm heading out into the woods to bring home my cache, let some intrepid hiker stumble upon it in 2030 for all I care.

These regulations will greatly reduce the interest in caching in the lower hudson valley and certainly lowers my interest.

It is the people of the State of New York who own those acres, not the high and mighty Park service or whatever holier than thou name they call themselves. I will go anywhere I want to in MY PARK and they can just go to hell.

Here's another thing, does the pathetic State acually expect anyone to pay cash for these dadgum permits. If so I would expect that no cacher feed any money into the mouths of these lowlives.

In closing the State can huff and puff all they want and they can certainly proclaim their little mandates to the people but after thats all said and done... let's see the bastards enforce it.

Peace.

February 12, 2005

I would like to take this opportunity to thank so many of you for your generous offers of help.I cant tell you how much I appreciate it.It seems to me..the way i read it now..caching is never going to be the same.However,I have decided to wait it out..and not do anything,until we really know how it will all end up.Im sure somewhere along the way,a date will be set for us to comply with the changes.Im hoping by then that i will be better able to get out there and do what has to be done.Again..let me thank all of you.It just proves that we still have wonderful folks out there who will help others.It gave me a big boost when i needed it most.Thank you.

Bill

February 13, 2005

LEAVE HARRIMAN ALONE!!!!!!!!!!

Now that I read jonboy's last post, let me say this - that is BS. You cannot expect cachers to remove caches just so the park ranger can issue permits. If he doesn't play by the rules and he is an official why should cachers?

It is a dadgum shame that they will be removed - I have not done all of jb's caches there but I have enjoyed those that I have. You know you're in for a good hike and a great spot. Those caches were there BEFORE the NEW RULES.

You do not walk every 528ft in Harriman and find a cache. There is distance between them and I think most of the group hikes I have done in there caches were more than a decent amount of space apart.

This is f$cking sh1t!

Edited February 13, 2005 by Squealy

February 13, 2005

LEAVE HARRIMAN ALONE!!!!!!!!!!

I can see the Office of Parks and Recreation quaking in their boots now!

Wait till we all start holding our breath and stomping our feet!

That'll show them who's boss!

February 13, 2005

Thanks for the flame jonboy -

8.1k · February 13, 2005

I am with Jonboy. I removed some of my Harriman caches today and will be back to remove the others.

But, I think people are missing Jonboy's point. He is removing his caches as visual proof we are complying. And will then go back and replace them with the required permits. Hopefully, we can remove the ones that are not in A spots and replace those that are.

I am considering the same for my Africa Loop. Although currently they bend the .25 rule all my others such as Powder Monkey I removed due to another cache being in close proximity.

We SHOULD be clearing out the caches and placing new ones in their places where appropriate: I loved Cache Ninja's Fl_exe cache and BigBill662's Torrey Mtn and would definately place a cache there if they open up.

I am heading back tomorrow to Kanawaukie if anyone wants to join me. :lostsignal:

Edited February 13, 2005 by avroair

February 13, 2005

I don't think fierce opinions voiced on this board are going to influence policy makers in Albany, it's sort of like going down into your basement to curse out your boss. If you feel so strongly about it, write to your elected representatives or join NYGO and organize to throw the appeasers out. In any case, it will take sustained effort.

Any park manager could force any or all the caches in his park to be archived, simply by contacting geocaching.com and demanding it. I know because this has happened to me, even if you refuse to remove them, they will disappear from the website. We are not negotiating from a position of strength, so tough talk of defiance is meaningless and futile. I am attempting to be proactive rather than reactive, instead of waiting to be contacted by geocaching.com and told that my caches have been taken off the website at the request of the park manager, I choose to remove them myself and be in a position to go meet with the park manager and talk about getting official permission for new placements. This is more likely to work in a small park like Fahnestock, that isn't saturated with hundreds of caches. I see Harriman as a worse case example of unrestricted geocache placements leading to what could be viewed as an intolerable situation. I am sure that it was the anarchic mess in Harriman that forced the Office of Parks and Recreation to act. As such, it will be the test case of whether geocachers can be responsible and geocaching be compatible with protecting the resource from over use and abuse. If we fail to cooperate in Harriman, it could have repercussions for geocachers through out the state.

3.9k · February 13, 2005

Well said Jon. I don't think Neil was trying to get through to the parks department, rather he was just letting off some steam.

I said earlier that I was going to wait it out, but after thinking things through and looking at the big picture, I think being proactive is the better choice. This is the policy right now, like it or not. It could be worse, it could be better. Let's work with what we have, prove that we are responsible land users, and negotiate from there.

Edited February 13, 2005 by JMBella

38.2k · February 13, 2005

But, I think people are missing Jonboy's point. He is removing his caches as visual proof we are complying. And will then go back and replace them with the required permits. Hopefully, we can remove the ones that are not in A spots and replace those that are.

Maybe in the end this will work out for the benefit of all, but as I see it now, the good caches are going bye-bye and we'll be left with the trash caches in the park.

February 13, 2005

There are much LARGER issues here.

This is all a Catch-22 situation. The NYSDEC all but banned caching with its permits and 2billion dollar liability insurance and then changed it now you can cache on DEC land. Now the State parks are creating their own guidelines.

Who is in charge?

The bureacracy is so fcukin big it is absurd. I bet the DEC and the people who run the State Parks do not communicate on any level. So, what, now the State Park people have to use taxpayer money to run their own study to see if geocaching impacts on State Park land when they know already from the DEC study that it does not?

Too many people around here BEND OVER. Oh, if we do x, we're in compliance and if we y, it shows we're participating in good faith and if we do Z, well, if we do Z, they can just grease it up and shove it right in.

Fcuk that!

They are willing to spend time and money seeking out plastic containers and ammo cans in the woods but can't stop people from pulling over on their roads and dumping a pile of sh1t and ruining the place, they can't stop people from zipping through the area on motorcycles and creating unsafe situations for everyone in the park and they sure as sh1t can't stop someone from breaking into your car. But they can spend time removing a canister that has NO bearing on the public's safety while in the park.

NO CACHER should purchase an Empire Pass this year. Walk into the park from somewhere nearby.

People from Jersey and Conn. should do the same. Contribute no money to State Parks for parking fees.

NO CACHING ORG. in NY should hold an event in a State Park.

If this is what you get for opening communication and trying to work with people what is the fcuking point?

I'd rather die on my feet than live on my knees.

Edited February 13, 2005 by Squealy

1k · February 13, 2005

They are willing to spend time and money seeking out plastic containers and ammo cans in the woods but can't stop people from pulling over on their roads and dumping a pile of sh1t and ruining the place, they can't stop people from zipping through the area on motorcycles and creating unsafe situations for everyone in the park and they sure as sh1t can't stop someone from breaking into your car. But they can spend time removing a canister that has NO bearing on the public's safety while in the park.

Thats just it...we are sitting ducks, an easy target and that is the numero uno reason we are so easily picked on. I think if anything, NYers should demand a town meeting of sorts and overwhelm them. This kind of stuff needs to be voted on and not just passed as a new bill. Afterall, where does the taxpayers decision stand in all this?

I'd rather die on my feet than live on my knees.

Well said, I agree 150%

Kar

February 13, 2005

They are willing to spend time and money seeking out plastic containers and ammo cans in the woods but can't stop people from pulling over on their roads and dumping a pile of sh1t and ruining the place, they can't stop people from zipping through the area on motorcycles and creating unsafe situations for everyone in the park and they sure as sh1t can't stop someone from breaking into your car. But they can spend time removing a canister that has NO bearing on the public's safety while in the park.

You forgot to mention the "cruisers" who loiter at the "parking lots" and who have their rendezvous' in the woods, frolicking to their hearts content. And NOTHING is done about THAT. Seems this type of activity is OK with them.

February 13, 2005

I love having all these public lands available for me to hike in, I was hiking on them long before geocaching was invented, and I would keep on hiking on them even if geocaching was banned altogether. I am not interested in starting a war with Park Rangers. I work with some of these rangers as a trail maintainer and as a search and rescue volunteer, and they are not malignant bureaucrats looking to harrass people just to feel powerful. With over two million visitors a year in Harriman State Park, it is ludicrous to think that a boycott by a handful of geocachers is going to have any impact at all. Yes I have disagreed with them on occasion, and will doubtless do so again, but they are not my enemies, they are the good guys. If you are looking for villains to battle with, the world is filled with them, but I want no part in a vendetta against a branch of government that is so important to me. That would be cutting off my nose to spite my face.

February 13, 2005

I would like to see, when the State begins charging for these permits, how many of you will be jumping into this. This should be obvious to anyone that this permit move is just another avenue for the state to take to our wallets. Anytime there is something going on the state needs to do one of two things, either to ban the activity all together or the prefered method of TAXATION. This is just a way for New York to delv into our collective wallets in order to support their bloated budgets. I would be ashamed of myself if I were to give these disgracful bureuocrats any of my hard earned cash.

Edited February 13, 2005 by matty714

February 13, 2005

I work with some of these rangers as a trail maintainer and as a search and rescue volunteer, and they are not malignant bureaucrats looking to harrass people just to feel powerful.

You see Jonboy, there is no such thing as a malignant bureaucrat. To be truly ineffective, bureaucrats have to work as part of a larger group with the decisions being made by the ones with the least input from the public. Bureaucrats especially ineffective when they have no personal interaction with those they affect.

As a demonstration, call into any town hall and ask for some information about a park in town, or a building code, or a health code, or whatever. On the phone, you willspeak to everyone in the town who does not have jurisdiction on the matter before being told that the one guy who does is out on sick leave for the next 6 months. You will never get your answer.

Now, in contrast, walk into the same town hall with a smile on and ask the same question. Within 10 minutes you are back on the road with your question answered and connections you can work with.

I deal with it on an almost daily basis. Nobody wants to make a decision because they never had to do it in the past. It is probably not their job to make that decision, they never had to do it in the past, so it must be someone elses decision to make.

Without seeing and understanding the whole situation, it is too easy for a state employee to reject an idea such as geocaching if it changes their status quo. Government agencies are enormous slow moving beasts whose sole desire is to avoid changes to the way things were done in the past. If the system worked for their predecessors, it will work for them.

Case in point. The Salem Witch Trials of 1692. Up through the end of the witch trials, it was perfectly acceptable to burn someone as a witch. The government said so. That is the way it was always done. Who was the government to change the rules?

(I borrowed clips from this website )

The judges based their decisions and and evaluations on various kinds of intangible evidence, including direct confessions, supernatural attributes (such as "witchmarks"), and reactions of the afflicted girls. Spectral evidence, based on the assumption that the Devil could assume the "specter" of an innocent person, was relied upon despite its controversial nature.

After 20 people had been executed in the Salem witch hunt, Thomas Brattle wrote a letter criticizing the witchcraft trials. This letter had great impact on Governor Phips, who ordered that reliance on spectral and intangible evidence no longer be allowed in trials.

See, the governor finally got the message that the decisions were bogus. He re-evaluated the way things were being done and (contratry to today's government agents) changed the way the system worked. Intangible evidence was no longer considered admissible as proof. Phantom spur trails (which they know they saw somewhere but can not find again), in my opinion are just as admissible as "witchmarks". Thank you State Parks for knocking back the legal system 313 years.

(Yes Avroair, I know it was actually the Brittish government at that point, but I am trying to make a point)

Edited February 13, 2005 by BMSquared

February 13, 2005

Example: I sit by the sidelines, just leaving my caches alone. Someone goes to find my cache, parks their car blocking a ranger road (it happens despite giving legit parking coordinates). State park cops come by and have a run-in with the geocacher who explains what he is doing. It now reflects poorly on me since I have a placed cache left without permission in a problematic area. Our caches are not hidden from the public (or park's) eyes available online so it is not hard to figure out where they are (exact coordinates to be precise!!!) and who placed them.

Just because you might follow the guidelines when placing caches does not mean that all people will follow them when finding them. The fact that you got a permit to place a cache will not stop people from parking illegally or bushwhacking to the cache. Are they going to revoke your permit because someone else didn't follow the rules.

This permit is laughable. If you look at the scanned images, the last section labelled "Participation" seems to be aimed at cache finders. When would a cache finder ever see this permit and those rules???

February 13, 2005

Case in point. The Salem Witch Trials of 1692. Up through the end of the witch trials, it was perfectly acceptable to burn someone as a witch. The government said so. That is the way it was always done. Who was the government to change the rules?

I know it goes against the thread of this discussion (which I want to have no part of until I fully think this mess through), but the government of 1692 was a long time ago; a better representation would be the almost identical government of 1950's with John McCarthy organizing his own witch-hunt, with his own agenda, parallelling the 1692 scenario -- except this time with the Reds.

8.8k · February 13, 2005

It would be good if we could all work with each other on this.

Edited February 13, 2005 by Eartha

3.9k · February 13, 2005

OK, let's all take a deep breadth. What are we talking about here? First we have the State parks saying, it's OK for us to cache on the parks they manage. They have outlined rules for us to follow. That should come as no surprise. Did we thing geocaching was going to fly under the radar forever? They could have easily follow the lead of the National Park Service and we would really have something to b!tch about.

The .25 rule is something I think we can live with, the 2 year rule is acceptable too IMO. What we have a problem with is the 5 caches per cachers, per park and the 20 foot off trail rule. Why is everybody reacting like this is nonnegotiable? I don't see it that way. When the permits and stickers come out I will be getting my permits and I will speak to whoever I need to speak to in my LOCAL Parks Dept. Then I can make a judgment regarding how strictly they are going to enforce every aspect of the policy. Let's not get our panties in a bunch just yet. This is a starting point, something that can be refined.

As far as Harriman and the great caches there, I'm sure Jon will be replacing the caches he's removing. Chances are the people who placed the crappy caches won't get the permits and they will be archived anyway.

It's not the end of the world, it's barely a problem yet. Let's relax and deal with what we have to deal with. We all need to be on the same page. This is not a time to jump down each others throats. I would love to see New York Admin take the lead on this but that's up to him. We all need to decide what we agree with and what we don't agree with and come up with a game plan. This is a workable situation if we keep cool.

8.1k · February 13, 2005

Well I removed my Pirate caches from Harriman today and asked the Park Ranger who was scooping the parking lot what she thought of the geocaching permit.

She responded by saying that geocaching is not permissable in Harriman,

'Well,' I countered, "It is now if I get a permit."

She had never heard about any permits, but didn't challenge me on it.

We then drove to the Bear Mtn administration building to go and get permits etc. Upon arrival I was told I had to pay $6.00 to park! What! You suck! I explained I just wanted to goto the office and the 16 year old kid waved me through.

Went to the administrative buidling and found the 'permits desk' and asked for a permit. Neither of the two nice ladies manning the desk had ever heard about the permits OR even geocaching. I explained to them what I was looking for and they looked around for me but were never able to find a permit or a memo or anything like that...

I guess the news hasn't filtered down to the majority of the rangers yet. I left my number with them to contact me when they would like me to get a permit or remove the caches. Oh well, guess I will keep my other caches until I get told to remove them.

It could possibly be a weekend part-time staff...

Nys Parks & Recreation Survey

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment